“Apple spent over a billion dollars on R&D in its last quarter and it appears we’ll be seeing a little of what the company’s been working on as OS X 10.9 development seems to be on track for introduction this year,” Jonny Evans reports for Computerworld.

“AppleInsider cites traffic reports from site visitors which seems to show visits from Macs running the next iteration of the OS shot up last month: ‘While October visits from OS X 10.9 were around three dozen total, the number swelled into the thousands in the just-concluded month of January,'” Evans reports. “The company has committed to frequent OS upgrades for Macs, the current version of the OS shipped in July 2012, while the preceding version made its debut in July 2011.”

Evans reports, “Mac OS X 10.9 is expected to see the introduction of support for Siri and Apple Maps on the Mac. It’s also possible the company may begin to introduce a more 3D-like user interface within the OS, or potentially within iOS.”

… broken. This is the sort of confusion you can stumble on with some languages. Lynx Links.
I suspect neither humor nor sarcasm here so much as a little confusion, possibly intended. The use of a name like Sucker would suggest a different attempt at humor/sarcasm.

… ignorant questions here for a) so, next is OSXI or b) so, next is tabby?
After OS 10.9 will be OS 10.10, then 10.11 … this is not “decimal system numbering”.
Next will be another small cat … ocelot? Because all the BIG cats have been used. Unless they decide to use an even rarer large cat … Liger, perhaps? Tigon? Or switch to canines, or clowns. It’s a CODE NAME!NB … agree, Lynx is a sensible name – me likes.

Aaah now Liger or Tigon would work rather well for a closer OSX/iOS combo with increased overlaps or Hybrid. However maybe time to move on to something else as a full OS11 upgrade with whatever chosen theme, especially as no doubt by then Mr Ive will have had spread his considerable design influence all over it.

Maps DO require GPS if you want to use the app for actually DRIVING to your destination. That’s why I would expect this feature in MacBooks. They’re mobile. [Using Wi-Fi router location detection while driving doesn’t cut it. Sorry.]

Excellent point. That is possible now via USB cellular keys. It would be interesting if Apple built cellular into laptops. I suspect that with time cellular will be in everything. But we have to get actual 4G standard tech and networks going first. I read today that the very first actual 4G network will be available in New Zealand in December of this year (2013). Beats me why it’s taking so long. The (actual) 4G standard was finished in 2008.

I have long been an advocate of incorporating cellular data capabilities in Mac laptops. But it should be pointed out that laptops have enough onboard storage space to hold extensive map databases without the need to stream the data from a server. That approach would not enable real-time updates and information (or advertisements), but it would be fully functional in terms of navigation. The stand-alone Garmin and TomTom GPS units work fine with stored maps.

I can hold a conversation over FaceTime or Skype with my MacBook Pro, and iMac without any problems at all using the same microphone that is inherent in the machines. I can, if I want to, dictate passages to Dragon Dictate on the Mac using the same microphone with little error. Therefore, having a noise cancellation microphone isn’t necessary to use Siri.

As for built in GPS on a Mac, that would be less than ideal. How many times are you going to use your Mac as a mobile device when hiking or driving. You can use Wi-Fi triangulation which should be good enough, or derive location data from your iPhone over WiFi.

Apple is rarely stupid. Offering Siri without a noise-canceling microphone is stupid. Apple has zero interest in all the complaints, most likely including your own BLN, when Siri can’t understand what you’re saying because of the noise IN YOUR CAR while you’re driving.

You can be such a dolt BLN. No wonder Microsoft is taking a dive. Take your damned pills! Yeah, those blue ones.

I have very little problem using Dragon Dictate for Mac using the built in microphone. You could if you want to use an external microphone for greater accuracy but the built in microphone works well enough for me.

Go read the Noise-Canceling Microphone page I so kindly provided and figure out WHAT THEY ARE FOR.

Drive in your car, using OS X dictation on a MacBook, and see just how wonderfully well OS X comprehends what you’re saying. It CAN’T. Why? Because of NOISE in your CAR because it has an ENGINE and there’s noise OUTSIDE and few cars are actually SOUNDPROOF. Are you getting the clue now? Good. :-D

Actually, these very naughty boys need a good spanking! But I am not interested in giving it to them. I’m only interested in people LEARNING and THINKING before they blether total bullshit at people. That’s NOT forgivable. THAT needs help. I need my coffee. YOU need to stop being an anonymous coward when you post.

GPS locations are based on satellites in stationary orbit. IP locations are based on where a given router was at some time, with no way to know if it is still correct.

I was in a campground, parked near a guy with a mobile satellite internet connection. The database of IP locations thought his router was still in Las Vegas, about 1500 miles away. Needless to say, any directions given using that router as the starting point were going to be way off. I like real GPS, not pretend GPS.

A) the new iMacs, for one, have noise cancelling, beam forming mics
B) There’s no need for GPS per se: Approximate geolocation is already built-in using both standard IP-based methods as well as the more accurate WiFi-based locating methods. In any case, even a simple Web browser-like mapping functionality would be welcome.

B) Maps for OS X will be great for when you are at your desk and want to get directions that will get sent to your phone. You don’t need GPS since you shouldn’t be using your laptop in the freakin car.

Gee whiz! The possibility of a “new” Mac OS! So, here’s the question: How many recent, i.e., new, Mac computers will it run on? Apple has managed to use the Microsoft-itis OS philosophy with its recent releases of new OSs: Build a new OS that will require only the newest processors, thereby eliminating a host of “older” – i.e., two years old – Macs to drive up profits; and, write the new OS code so that there is a guarantee that older computers won’t run it. The over-view presented in the article leaves the impression that the newest OS will be designed more for the iPhone, Captain Crook’s passionate obsession, than for the Mac itself. Question: Where is the compelling reason to upgrade to a new OS when Apple has nearly abandoned software development?: four year old iWork, two year old iLife – not to mention its decreasing quality! And how’s it going with software developers who will now have to re-write code for a new OS replacing one that is barely pushing a year old? Anyone seen any really good software programs for the Mac lately? Read the comments of software users who buy the limited software for the App Store: Most of the programs are pure garbage. Why should software companies develop software that has to be constantly rewritten? Something smells rotten at Apple! Does Captain Crook have a real sense of where his ship is headed?

I agree. These constant OS updates make it very difficult for third party software and hardware developers to keep up. By the time they do there is another OSX to deal with. Plus the hassle to users. Slow down a bit Apple and get some of the bugs out first, like Finder copies.